David Brooks’ review of Charles Murray’s new book, “Coming Apart: The State of White America 1960- 2010″ begins with a very broad admission that Brooks would “be shocked if there’s another book that so compellingly describes the most important trends in American society.”

So you must be curious as to what would prompt Brooks to make such a sweeping statement about a book by the author of “The Bell Curve,” an earlier book looking at IQ and race.   Brooks describes “Coming Apart” as dealing with the polarization of American society since 1963 using data on mostly white Americans.  In a Youtube video, the author describes the scenario that prompted his writing of this book as his reflections on a time when there was a common understanding of what it meant to be American. He acknowledges these times have passed and that things are now coming apart.

In “Coming Apart,” the upper tribe lives in certain cities near each other, associate with each other and have similar behavioral habits. They recreate themselves from one generation to the next.  Conversely, the lower tribe bear more children out of wedlock, live in fragmented communities, and young men between 30 and 49 years of age during their prime working years tend to drop out from the labor force in higher numbers than those in the upper class.  ”You might say the country has bifurcated into different social tribes, with a tenuous common culture linking them,” says Brooks. And “Coming Apart” calls for the upper tribe to have more interaction with the lower tribe.

Murray’s analysis, according to Brooks, runs contrary to the beliefs of both the Republicans and Democrats.  He also suggests that a narrative in which the “salt of the earth common people are preyed upon by this or that nefarious elite” is wrong.  What the country needs, according to Brooks even though he believes Murray would disagree, is a National Service Program in which the values, practices and institutions are shared by upper and lower tribe members who work together for a few years.

But this sounds like the same old thing to me. Is white America most representative of American society? If Murray does not talk about race since the statistics are drawn from white Americans, are we to swallow his conclusions as being on target when it comes to issues of class?

A discussion about upper and lower class or even wealth versus poverty is not the same as a discussion about power disparity. To suggest that a possible solution is for the upper and lower tribes to get together and the good will rub off on the bad is a tad paternalistic. It does not address or unpack the power disparities.

Brooks’ suggestion that the upper and lower spend a few years together is reminiscent of the communes set up in China when Mao came to power.  Mao felt the upper class was divorced from the nation and the rural farmers.  And that the upper and lower tribes, although he didn’t call them that, should work together. It didn’t work for China.  They have since gone the way of capitalism and are now the world’s largest lender.

Bell’s earlier incendiary book, “The Bell Curve,” elicited much controversy. That book’s  thesis sought to prove American society was becoming more of a meritocracy as evidenced by the distribution of wealth and other positive outcomes directly related to one’s IQ and not one’s social background.

This set off  bad feelings as a coded public discussion purportedly based on research and hard facts. Media pundits could not get enough of  discussing the book’s implications on race even though they all seemed to agree the science on which the book was written was not sound.

I have not read this book. And even though I respect Brooks as a thought leader,  I often disagree with him. I feel as some others do.  This book will add fire to the feeling that people like Mitt  Romney do not care about the poor.  Most of all, I am with those that feel “the idea (upon which the book is based) is not something new.”

Related stories:

Are We Living in a Caste Society?

New Study Links Racism and Conservative Beliefs with Low IQ